You Don’t Have To Leave Wolfy Behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' Your Companions Level Up With You!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 8170880" data-attributes="member: 12731">Thank you for your fascinating insight, Mr Tweet. But I have questions.Hm. I read that link and it's all over the place. First question, what is a "balanced" Cleric to you? (Mixing answers does not help design - are you striving for fun, for the at-will/daily dichotomy, for the bonus/voluntary cleric vs the mandatory cleric, or what? The small-reduction-in-combat vs the large-increase-in-healing? But to answer that last question you must first take a stance on the other questions! Or perhaps you mean "all of the above" in which case I agree, yes it's impossible to achieve perfection.)To treat "clerics are impossible to balance" as a truism without explanation, this article feels unmoored. What is the problem it is addressing?This article also feels a bit wonky in that it does not appear to discuss the 5E cleric at all. That game attempts to provide a solution where significant healing is generally not needed, thus trying to make Clerics voluntary rather than mandatory without overpowering them.There are other solutions that too feel relevant and that I would love your analysis of. Many video games provide very strong and plentiful healing potions, or even give all sorts of characters regenerative powers in some form, so dedicated healers aren't a must. Pathfinder 2 provides a very strong Medicine skill, meaning any magical healing can be focused on in-combat (emergency) healing - the Cleric doesn't generally need to spend spell slots on out-of-combat hit point replenishment.And then there's the World of Warcraft trinity (I'm sure it wasn't the first game using this model): tank, DPS, healer which D&D has never even attempted. We can say whatever we like about that, except "it's impossible to balance". If MMORPGS are anything, it's that they're balanced.Best Regards,Zapp</blockquote>

Verification